New Equality Act 2010 - Essay Example

?Extended Essay on the New Equality Act Introduction Inequalities in societies have existed from the historic times. There have always been maleand female, Rich and poor, educated and non educated and superior and inferior. These inequalities have found their way in the modern society. However, they are not well embraced in the modern times. It is believed that all people are equal regardless of their gender and race. As such, governments have been pushing for equality policies across the world. The United Kingdom parliament introduced the equality act 2010. This act was based on a number of laws and acts that had been introduced in the United Kingdom in the past. Despite its introduction, equality is yet to be achieved in the workplace (Varkaik, 2005). There are many challenges facing the implementation of this act. The equality act 2010 promises to equate all people regardless of their gender and race in the workplace but faces many challenges in the implementation, which need to be addressed accordingly. History of Equality Act 2010 The vision and objectives of the equality act 2010 were proposed back in the 1960s. It had been realized that some groups, gender, and races were discriminated against in the United Kingdom in many sectors. Some people were paid less in the workplace; others had challenges getting jobs because they belonged to a certain race and others because of their gender. The equal pay act of the 1970 was the first law to be passed regarding this. According to this law, people doing the same workload in the same department are required to be paid the same amount regardless of their gender and race. Employers were required to provide claims why some people would be paid more than others while working in the same departments with the same work timeframes (United Kingdom Legislation, 2013). This act was followed by the sex discrimination act of 1975 on 12 November 1975. This act was meant to ensure that men and women had equal opportunities for education and work. Employers and institutions of learning were required to admit all people qualified for the positions regardless of their gender (United Kingdom Legislation, 2013). The Race relations act followed in 1976 and was signed into law on 22 November 1976. This act was to provide equal opportunities for learning and work regardless of a person’s race, color, nationality and ethnic origin. No employer or institution would discriminate any person basing on these grounds (United Kingdom Legislation, 2013). Disability act of 1995 also forms a part of the equality act 2010. Disabled people should have equal opportunities to employment basing on this law. The Equality Law 2010 (Work Place) The passing of the Equality Act 2010 was embraced by many people across the United Kingdom. However, there are serious concerns about whether anything will change. Experts have been documenting everything that has been happening after passing of the vital acts which form a part of the Equality Act 2010. They have confirmed that indeed, not a lot of changes have been documented after the passing of those acts. No wonder some people have been questioning what has been happening in the last four decades from the time the Equal Pay act was passed in 1970. The very things the parliament meant to protect people from have been happening right under their eyes. Discrimination This is one of the largest problems in the United Kingdom in the current times. Despite the passing of laws to reduce discrimination, research indicates otherwise (Favre, Grainger and Brewer, 2011). Women and minority races in the United Kingdom are the most affected. Women do not have equal opportunities with men in the work place (Verkaik, 2008). While many men are employed in well paying permanent jobs, only a few women are employed. The other women are employed in low paying part time (Lee, 2002). In fact, only about 30% on average women are employed in the permanent well paying jobs. The percentage of women in the low paying part time jobs is 79%. This clearly indicates that most men are employed in permanent jobs, thereby leaving only a small proportion for lower paying part time jobs. On the other hand, since women cannot get the high paying jobs, most of them settle for lower paying part-time. No wonder the percentage is so high (Hills, 2010). Experts can authoritatively confirm that there is a lot of discrimination in the workplace. Recent statistics indicate that the number of women being educated is equal if not higher than that of men. In fact, there are some institutions where the number of female students is much higher than male. About twenty institutions in the United Kingdom have recorded double female student to male student ratio. Basing on this data, the number of women in high paying permanent jobs should actually be equal to that of men if not higher (Paton, 2011). One graduate, working at one of the United Kingdom firm questions why there is such a big difference yet education status is the same? It is interesting to note that men are paid much higher even in women led jobs for example media and law (Guyard-Nedelec, 2007) as several research and case studies by a number of journalists and experts have indicated. Pay disparity In addition to the high rate of discrimination against women in the workplace, data also indicate that employed women are paid much lower than men. This is regardless of whether the job is permanent or part-time (Furnham and Wilson, 2011; Gregg and Wadsworth, 2011). On average, women receive between 15% and 25% lower than men depending on the region. London, the home of the United Kingdom parliament law makers leads in pay disparity between men and women. Women in London receive an approximately 23% lower than men. Data also indicates that the wage gap is high in the private sector with an average gap of 26% compared to 20% average gap in the public sector (European Commission, 2013). Salary increments remain approximately the same in men and women. However, some organizations are increasing the pay for women slightly higher than that of men. Basing on that increment, it would take approximately fifty two years for the payment to be equal for men and women. Minority groups in the United Kingdom receive much lower pay compared to their United Kingdom born majorities. Employers believe that minorities cannot be paid the same amount as the U.K population. At the same time, there is a belief that most minorities especially those that migrate to the United Kingdom are from poor countries and can accept any payment. In that case, employers will rarely pay minority groups the same as whites in the United Kingdom. Using data from the low income estates, it was found out that most of the minorities live in these regions. In the United Kingdom, low income estates comprised 65% Bangladeshi, 50% Pakistani, 30% Black African, 15-20% Caribbean Origin and other minorities and 10% Whites. That clearly shows that they receive much lower payments compared to their white counterparts (Karlsen and Nazroo, 2002). The most affected gender of the minorities is women. Most employers would rather employ men minorities compared to women. In December 2012, the parliamentary Group on Race and community claimed that there were concerns that women from the minority groups did not get employment. This is based on the same perception that makes men preferable to women in any sector in the United Kingdom. Some women could secure employment but they have to be just normal women. Women with the Muslim Hijab and “hard to pronounce” names are not employed in most cases (International Labor Organization, 2013). Challenges in the workplace Basing on the data above, it is certain that something is terribly wrong somewhere. Experts believe that there has to be many challenges that have been preventing the proper implementation of the equality Act in the workplace. Some of the challenges are based on history and perception about certain races and gender while others are based on the actions of the parliamentary system. United Kingdom Parliament by Example The theory of, preaching water and taking wine, is the best example that can be used to illustrate what the United Kingdom parliament has been doing. It is beyond reasonable doubts that the person who proposes something, should lead by example. Only in such cases the others would find it necessary to follow what the role model is doing. In the case of the equality, through the several acts and the recently signed Equality Act 2010, nothing has changed much in the United Kingdom Parliament and across the jurisdiction. It would be expected that parliament would be the very first institution to follow the equality act accordingly. In this case, there should be equal number of men and women legislators and all minorities would be represented in the parliament. However, this is not the case. The percentage of women legislators in the United Kingdom Parliament is 22%; 22.5% in the lower house and 22.6% in the upper house (Women in National Parliaments, 2013). At the same time, most of the minorities are not represented across the United Kingdom. Experts have stated that minorities are either not represented or under represented in the United Kingdom (Field house and Sobolewska, 2012). Experts believe that the United Kingdom Parliament had enough time to make the changes and be a good role model. They have had four decades to make these changes in the parliamentary system but nothing much has been done. If they had worked towards that to improve the representation of women and minorities, then employers across the jurisdiction would not have a problem implementing the same policies in their businesses and organizations. Tradition, Perception and Prejudice Since the historical times, there has always been perception and prejudice towards the various gender, races and nationalities. For example, there has always been a perception that women are weaker compared to men and cannot do work done by men. They are required to stay at home and take care of the home and family. There are also perceptions that certain groups of people are weaker compared to others. The Caucasians are deemed superior to other races in the world. These perceptions and prejudice have found their way into the modern society (Bam-Hutchison, n.d). Some people have even proposed that the different ethnic groups in Britain to have their own systems for schools, courts and hospitals. This is probably the highest form of discrimination (Hari, 2008). This traditional perception is well embraced by the modern society. No wonder, most women are not employed in the permanent, high paying jobs. How do you explain higher number of female graduates yet higher number of male jobs? It shows that the society is yet to deviate from this system. In addition, minorities in especially the United Kingdom are not taken serious for jobs. There are many well educated minorities with invaluable experience yet they do not get good jobs. Most of them have to depend on the low paying part-time jobs. This explains why most of the minorities cannot be found living in high edge suburban areas (Karlsen and Nazroo, 2002). Internal organization policies These two factors have always played a role in the drafting of organizational policies for most institutions and businesses in the world. Research indicates that most of the companies even the very large ones do not have female board members or executives. A cross check on the fortune five hundred companies indicate only 22 of the 500 companies have female Chief Executive Officers. The percent of women in executive boards in the world was only 14% as of 2012 (Davidson and Burke, 2011). In the United Kingdom, women in high end executive positions were only 6.6%. There was a slight improvement compared to 5% the previous year (Cherry, 2008). Some organizations have internal policies that indicate no women can be employed on the board of directors. Good examples are the Barclay Bank and the Royal Bank of Scotland. There are probably more organizations but they are not known for secrecy in their board members. It is estimated that 27% of fortune 500 companies do not have women in their executive boards (Meier, 2012). Other companies prefer employing people from certain races. In the United Kingdom, most organizations and businesses would rather employ Caucasians compared to especially the minorities. Laws and Consistency in job The discrimination against women in high paying permanent jobs can be explained by the perception among the board members and the society at large. One of the things most people are certain is that most women have to get families at some point. Families come with a lot of responsibilities but the one thing that worries most business owners is women getting children. This would mean that they have to go on a maternity leave for sometime. Basing on the current statistics, the average number of children per family is 1.8. 15% of families have more than three children, 39% have two children and the rest have one child. In this case, a female worker will have to go for two children birth maternity leaves within a few years. Most women give birth to children at an age gap of about three years on average. That means that a female worker is likely to go for two leaves in just over five years (Office for National Statistics, 2012). Most business owners and employers believe that this is a disruption in the normal function of the business. At the same time, the employer may incur some costs of getting more employees to cover for the female employee on maternity leave. Employees on maternity leaves are usually paid their basic salary. To make things easier for them, they would prefer to hire men (Wright and Conley, 2011). The possible disruption caused by female workers during maternity leaves has made some organizations and businesses to come up with discriminatory laws against women. There are companies that have been charging women money for getting pregnant. At the same time, women may be discriminated against when they get pregnant at their places of work (United Kingdom Legislation, 2013). No wonder most employers fear employing women especially in their children bearing ages (Stange, Oyster and Sloan, 2011). Introduction of the equality Act 2010 has sparked a heated debate among legislators, business owners and women. While legislators agree that women have equal rights to employment, others believe that they should not be employed especially in their child bearing years. Yorkshire and Lincolnshire MEP, Godfrey Bloom claimed that women and men have varying roles. According to him, women are good at tidying up the house and not getting ahead in business. At the same time, Bloom was of the view that women have not produced many great works despite having all the resources. According to him, employment law should be changed to allow businesses especially the small ones to fire female employees who become pregnant. He pointed out that women should be replaced once they become pregnant (Peev, 2013). The big question at this juncture is whether a legislator who speaks like that really supports equality. In fact, the comments seem to support discrimination. Improvements Despite the many challenges in the work place in the United Kingdom, there are number of changes that have experienced. He gender wage gap for example has reduced by 9.6% in the last year (Office for National Statistics, 2012). Some organizations and businesses are working towards equality. The number of women being employed in the various sectors is increasing. Though the pace is slow, women are grateful there are steps being taken. The number of women in boards has increased in the last few years (European Working Conditions Observatory, 2013). At the same time, more organizations and businesses are employing women to avoid being named proponents of discrimination against women (Honeyball, 2013) as per the Equality Act 2010 (United Kingdom Legislation, 2013). Salaries for women have also been improving better than for men through salary increments. There are rumors that some companies have actually cut salaries for men in a bid to reduce the wage gap. Discrimination against women, gay, lesbian, heterosexual and transsexual people as well as minorities have reduced significantly. Employers are taking control across the United Kingdom to avoid being sued for the same. There quite a number of companies that have been sued for discrimination and sexual harassment. The fines charged for those offenses are making other employers and business owners to be extra careful. The way forward One thing that cane authoritatively confirmed is that most people are willing to follow new laws and policies. However, they should be guided well by the legislators. For the equality Act 2010 to work effectively, the United Kingdom Parliament will have o show unconditional support for the act. The first thing the parliament should focus on is to ensure there is equality in parliament. In this case, there should be the same number of men and women in the chambers. All people in the society including the very few minorities should be represented in the parliament. All legislators should also have equal pay and access to the same resources regardless of their gender, color and race as per the Equality Act 2010 (United Kingdom Legislation, 2013). In addition, the parliament should make all details regarding the legislators for example salaries and any other information regarding them is made public and accessible to all people. These are some of the key propositions in the equality Act 2010. Following all the guidelines of the act would encourage all people in the United Kingdom to appreciate these propositions and follow them accordingly (United Kingdom Civil Service, 2013). Another thing the United Kingdom Parliament should consider doing is establishing organizations that would be responsible to ensure the smooth implementation of the act and transition from the old laws and acts. Organizations established for this purpose should be specific for this only. There is tendency to give such responsibilities to institutions that are already overwhelmed and overburdened by the current responsibilities. Such institutions would not be able to work effectively towards the achievement of the goals and objectives set. This could be the reason why some of the important acts have failed to meet the goals set in the past including the Acts drafted in the past and are part of the equality act 2010. Enough resources should be set aside to ensure that the institutions given these responsibilities carry out their chores without any hitches. Institutions given the responsibility of implementation should also be tasked to monitor and evaluate the way people work around the act (United Kingdom Civil Service, 2013). With successful implementation of the Equality Act 2010 in the parliament, people and employers will at least have a point of reference. They are likely to ask why it cannot work for them if it has worked for the parliament. At the same time, they would be motivated to work towards the goals set by this particular act. The society would improve remarkably. Conclusion The Equality Act 2010 proposes equality from all fronts in the United Kingdom jurisdiction. People in the region will be able to work anywhere regardless of their gender, race and color. At the same time, they will have equal opportunities and salaries. Equality act was started four decades ago and nothing much has changed in that timeline. The Parliament can play an important role in the implementation of the equality act 2010 by being the role model. Legislators should ensure they follow each guideline they proposed in the act, set implementation and evaluation institutions in place before proceeding to the rest of the jurisdiction. This would provide a point of reference and motivation to follow in the same steps. Equality ensures diversity in the workplace making it easy to address issues and improve productivity. References Bam-Hutchison, J., n.d. Race, Faith, and UK Policy: a brief history. [online] The University of York. Available at: [Accessed 24 November 2013]. Cherry, J., 2008. Breaking the Barriers: Women in Senior Management in the U.K. [online] Catalyst. Available at: [Accessed 24 November 2013]. Davidson, M and Burke, R. 2011. Women in Management Worldwide: Progress and Prospects. Furnham: Gower Publishing Ltd. European Commission, 2013. Gender pay gap statistics. [online] European Commission. Available at: [Accessed 24 November 2013]. European Working Conditions Observatory, 2013. Number of women on boards of top UK companies increases. [online] European Working Conditions Observatory. Available at: [Accessed 24 November 2013]. Favre, R., Grainger, H, and Brewer, R. 2011. Discrimination and Unfair Treatment in the Workplace. British Journal of Industrial Relations, 49 (2), 207-235. Field house, E and Sobolewska, M., 2012. Introduction: Are British Ethnic Minorities Politically Under-represented? Parliamentary Affairs, 66(2), 235. Furnham, A and Wilson, E. 2011. Gender differences in estimated salaries: A UK study. The Journal of Social Economics, 40(5), 623-630. Gregg, P and Wadsworth, J. 2011. The Labor Market in Winter: The State of Working Britain. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Guyard-Nedelec, A., 2007. Discrimination against women lawyers in England and Wales. Internet Journal for Gender Studies, 17. Hari, J., 2008. Why multiculturalism must be abandoned. [online] The Richard Dawkins Foundation. Available at: [accessed 24 November 2013]. Hills, J. 2010. An Anatomy of Economic Inequality in the UK - Report of the National Equality Panel. [online]Social Science Research Network. Available at: [accessed 24 November 2013]. Honeyball, M., 2013. More women are in work - but what about the gender pay gap? International Labor Organization, 2013. The sex and race workplace double whammy. [online] International Labor Organization. Available at: [accessed 24 November 2013. Karlsen, S and Nazroo, J., 2002. Relation Between Racial Discrimination, Social Class, and Health Among Ethnic Minority Groups. American Journal of Public Health, 92(4), 624-631. Lee, D., 2002. Gendered workplace bullying in the restructured UK Civil Service. Personal Review 31(2), 205-227. Meier, S., 2012. 27% of Fortune 500 Companies Have No Women Executives. [online] Available at: [Accessed 24 November 2013]. Office for National Statistics, 2012. Family size in 2012. [online] Office for National Statistics. Available at [Accessed 24 November 2013]. Office for National Statistics, 2012. Gender pay gap falls to 9.6% in 2012. [online] Office for National Statistics. Available at: [Accessed 24 November 2013]. Paton, G. 2011. David Willetts warns over 'striking' university gender gap. [online] The Telegraph. Available at: [Accessed 24 November 2013]. Peev, G., 2013. Bongo bongo land' UKIP politician now says companies should be allowed to sack women who get pregnant. [online] Mail Online. Available at: [Accessed 24 November 2013]. Stange, M., Oyster, C, and Sloan, J., 2011. Encyclopedia of Women in Today's World. London: Sage. The UK’s gender pay gap is currently 22 per cent – the sixth worst in the EU. [online] The Independent. Available at: [accessed 24 November 2013]. United Kingdom Civil Service, 2013. Improving policy making capability. [online] Available at: http://my.civilservice.gov.uk/reform/the-reform-plan/improving-policy-making/ [ Accessed 24 November 2013]. United Kingdom Legislation (a), 2013. Equal Pay Act 1970. [online] . United Kingdom Legislation. Available at: [Accessed 24 November 2013]. United Kingdom Legislation (b), 2013. Race Relations Act 1976. [online] United Kingdom Legislation. Available at: [Accessed 24 November 2013]. United Kingdom Legislation (c), 2013. Equality Act 2010: Direct Discrimination dual characteristics. [online] United Kingdom Legislation. Available at: [Accessed 24 November 2013]. United Kingdom Legislation (d), 2013. Sex Discrimination Act 1975: Direct and indirect discrimination against women. [online] United Kingdom Legislation. Available at: [Accessed 24 November 2013]. United Kingdom Legislation (e), 2013. Sex Discrimination Act 1975: Discrimination on the ground of pregnancy or maternity leave. [online] United Kingdom Legislature. Available at: [Accessed 24 November 2013]. Verkaik, R. 2008. UN says sexual discrimination is rife in Britain. [online] The Independent. Available at: [Accessed 24 November 2013]. Verkaik, R. 2005. Thirty years on, women still face discrimination in the workplace [online] The Independent. Available at: [Accessed 24 November 2013]. Women in National Parliaments, 2013. World Classification. [online] Women in National Parliaments. Available at: [Accessed 24 November 2013]. Wright, T and Conley, H., 2011. Gower Handbook of Discrimination at Work. Furnham: Gower Publishing Ltd. Read More